Tuesday, November 6, 2012

Benghazi gets a denial

The September 11th attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi left four Americans dead: Tyrone Woods, Glen Doherty, Sean Smith, and Chris Stevens. Devin Dwyer (ABC News) reports that President Barack Obama has stated today, "Any allegations of cover-up are nonsense, and I've said so repeatedly. Look, these are our people that we send into harm's way."

Yes, you did. And you apparently did not give them the needed protection before or during the attack.

Not everyone at the Washington Post is as talented as Erik Wemple. Take, for example, Max Fisher supposedly asking about blame but offering this:The details of bureaucratic infighting over consulate security might
seem enormously significant now that they have undergone such public
scrutiny, but it’s very difficult to imagine those disputes reaching top
U.S. leaders beforehand. The U.S. has 200-plus
embassies and consulates abroad; their security requests are not
cabinet-level decisions. Barring some extraordinary revelation, the
strongest case for top-level responsibility is that these people oversee
the people who oversee the people who made the decisions about security
in Benghazi. That’s not nothing, but it’s not exactly the next
Iran-Contra affair, either.

Tuesday,
November 6, 2012. Chaos and violence continue, Taji is slammed with a
bombing, Nouri (at present) can't get the support he needs to form a
majority-government, Moqtada al-Sadr continues to present as a leader,
Nouri and his Cabinet attempt to gut the food ration card system, the
European press appears to miss that the cards have more than one use,
Ayad Allawi says Nouri will appear before Parliament, Massoud Barzani
finishes up a tour of the region, and more.

There are also consulates in Basra, Mosul and Kirkuk, each with upwards of 1000 employees.

These
figures include more than just the bureaucrats and diplomats that
immediately spring to mind – the embassy also houses CIA officers,
intelligence analysts, defence attaches and upwards of 5,000 security
contractors.

They do everything from peeling potatoes to providing diplomats and businessmen with armed security details.

Exact figures and details of precise activities are hard to come by, but the latest report from US Central Command details 7,336 contractors working for the Pentagon in Iraq.

It's not just the Pentagon
outsourcing its boots on the ground – when other government agencies
(such as the US State Department) are factored in the numbers become
closer to 13,500.

While Obama and Romney
cross verbal swords over the withdrawal of troops and how it took place,
the privatisation of America's significant and ongoing presence in Iraq
does not rate a mention.

Also noting the US election is Wael Grace (Al Mada) who points out
that Barack's 'withdrawal' has left behind US military as "trainers"
and Marines guarding the US diplomatic staff as well as contractors.

Taji has been slammed by a bombing which has left many dead and many injured. Reuters quotes police
officer Ahmed Khalef stating, "There were army trainees leaving the
base and small buses were waiting for them when the explosion took
place. We immediately started to rescue the wounded. You could smell
charred bodies." Earlier today, Adam Schreck (AP) reported 27 dead (and possibly a suicide bomber) and over forty injured. Hours later, Schreck updated to 33 dead and fifty-six injured. The Frontier Post notes the suicide car bombing was "at the entrance to an Iraqi army base" where recruits were lining up. AFP adds,
"The explosion appears to have occurred as they left the base at
lunchtime. But sources told the AFP news agency there had also been a
recruitment event on Tuesday to welcome potential new soldiers. Such
events have been targeted by militants in the past." Yesterday Mohammed Tawfeeq (CNN) reported a Taji car bombing as well -- one that claimed 1 life and left seven injured.

Yasir Ghazi (New York Times) quotes
Mohamed Talal who was hoping to enlist, "I was heading to the place
near the parking lot to check my name when all of sudden a strong
explosion happened where people were gathering. I turned and started to
run, and I began to feel shrapnel in my back and I fell to the ground."

Jane Arraf (Al Jazeera) states, "Our police source said that the attack was a parked car bomb, and not a suicide blast." Reuters notes
that the death toll has risen, "A suicide bomber rammed his
explosive-filled car into soldiers outside an army base near Baghdad on
Tuesday, killing 31 people and injuring tens more in one of the worst
attacks this year on the country's military."

For
more than two decades, Iraq has been running what the World Food
Program (WFP) has called "the largest public food program operating in
the world today". The system dates back to August 1990, when President
Saddam Hussein's army invaded Kuwait. In response, the UN Security
Council adopted Resolution 661, imposing sanctions and blocking
virtually all trade with the country. The government of Iraq quickly
established a PDS to provide food and other basic necessities to all
Iraqis. Little did they know the system would remain in place for more
than 20 years. Because sanctions hampered Iraq's ability to sell oil
or buy food, hardship intensified in the years following the 1991 Gulf
War that ousted Iraqi troops from Kuwait. In 1995, Security Council
Resolution 986 created the UN Oil-for-Food Program, and the PDS was
expanded. But, through the sanctions period and during the almost nine
years of occupation that followed the 2003 US invasion of Iraq, a
significant portion of the population remained vulnerable to hunger.

Are
we not supposed to think? I'm sorry, I thought humans were the thinking
animal. I thought we processed. I thought we did more than just
offered he-said, she-said. Seems to me if Nouri's killing off the
ration card system, you ask a few questions, you make a few
observations.

And I'm real sorry but it's not just about the food or has the press been sleeping for the last years?

Pretend
I am an Iraqi. I want to vote in the provincial elections scheduled
for early next year. And I want to vote in the parliamentary elections
which are supposed to take place in 2014. How do I do that?

Currently -- pay attention AFP
-- I would do as I have done since the US invasion. I would display a
food ration card. This is the identification system that's used.

And
a move away from the card system? With an election coming up and one
supposed to follow within 12 months after the provincial elections? I
think it's safe to argue it's a pretty damn stupid time to drop the food
ration cards. Nouri can't even pull off a census. We're supposed to
believe he can handle voter registration?

Immediately
someone wearing a dunce cap insists, "Well they can end the program and
just use the cards." Yes, they can. If no new voters are coming into
the process. Good thing Iraq's got a population that rends old, right?
Good thing -- Oh, wait. Iraq's median age is 20-years. Iraq has an
incredibly young population and the percentage that will be coming of
age for the parliamentary election is a significant proportion of Iraq's
estimated 30 million people.

So what are
you telling us? The ration card system is ending but you're still going
to issue cards for the next two years to take care of the voting issue?

We've
talked about what is. Let's note what this may be based on past
history: Yet another attempt by Nouri to skew the elections in his own
favor.

For those who've forgotten, Iraq is in
the midst of a political crisis -- one caused by Nouri al-Maliki.
Unhappy that his State of Law did not come in first in the 2010
parliamentary elections, Nouri dugs his heels in for 8 months while the
US government backed him and figured out a way to disregard the Iraq
Constitution, the will of the people and the vote. The White House
decided a contract could sidestep all the issues. So the 8 month
political stalemate ended in November 2010 with Nouri and the leaders of
the other political blocs signing the Erbil Agreement. The contract
had concessions from Nouri (such as the formation of an independent
national security commission, Article 140 of the Constitution finally be
implemented, and more) and, in return, the blocs agreed to let Nouri
have a second term as prime minister. Nouri used it to get that second
term and then trashed the contract, refused to honor it. By the
summer of 2011, it was obvious that Nouri didn't -- as the US State
Department repeatedly lied -- just need more time. No, Nouri wasn't
going to follow the contract. That's when Moqtada al-Sadr, the Kurds
and Iraqiya began demanding that the Erbil Agreement be honored.
Nouri's failure to honor the contract started political stalemate II.
His desire to target Sunnis and Iraqiya led to the political crisis.

Mohammed Sabah (Al Mada) reports
today that Nouri's wish to further disregard the votes, the voters and
the other parties (including Iraqiya which won the parliamentary
election) has been stymied for while he still wants to form a
"majority-government" (he would block out political rivals), he's
worried that both Iraqiya and the Kurds would prevent him from forming
that if he dissolved the current government. It's a sign of just howed
cowed and cowardly the White House is that Nouri's trying to form a
majority-State of Law-government and they're not saying a word. The
runner up in the 2010 election is trying to seize total control of the
government and the White House is too chicken to speak up publicly. Al Rafidayn reports
that not only is the National Alliance (Shi'ite party led by Ibrahim
al-Jaafari) split on Nouri's plan for a majority government but the Sadr
bloc has also made clear that they oppose it. Let's again note, as we
have since 2010, Moqtada al-Sadr wants to be the next prime minister of
Iraq. In the last years, he's gone out of his way to make moves and
take positions that are seen as inclusive of all Iraqis. And reportedly
(this is what the US government was told), one of the reasons Moqtada
finally agreed to back Nouri on the second term in 2010 was because the
Iranian government told Moqtada, come 2014, they would back him. A
little while ago, when oil rich Iraq, according to Nouri, had no oil
surplus funds to share with the people, Moqtada cried foul. He's
refused to leave that issue alone and Nouri's been forced to admit that
there are funds. Moqtada's still not leaving it alone. All Iraq News reports
that a delegation from the Sadr bloc met today with Minister of
Finance Rafie al-Issawi to discuss this issue and find out what the
progess was on it. The bloc issued a statement noting they will
continue to stay focused on this and ensure that the country and its
children benefit from the oil.

Moqtada
is positioning himself to be Iraq's future prime minister. There's no
reason he shouldn't but he is, to the White House, "Iraq's radical
cleric." If they wanted to stop Moqtada (and they do), the easiest way
would have been to back Iraqiya in 2010 when it won the parliamentary
elections. Then Ayad Allawi would be prime minister (most likely it
would have been him, he is the head of Iraqiya) and if Iraqis were even
just a little bit better off, he'd be sailing into another term in
2014. Instead, the White-House-dreaded Moqtada may be the one. Al Mada reports
that Allawi declared yesterday that the political crisis has led to
serious differences and that Nouri must appear before Parliament as has
been requested. If the work is too much for Nouri, Allawi says, then
Nouri can leave the work to others because many would be happy to take
on Nouri's job.

Al Mada reports
that Baghdad made third dirtiest capital on the United Nations
Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization's ranking as a result
of environmental pollution. Meanwhile All Iraq News reports Iraq's Ministry of the Environment is noting the waste in the Khasa River water in Kirkuk -- oil and construction materials.

Turning to England, as noted at War Criminal Tony Blair's online office,
he decided to kick off the work week with another speech, this one to
the Iraq Britain Business Council's 4th London Conference. To them, he
declared "So these are all compelling reasons for Britain and British
investment to be part of Iraq's future. But, naturally, in addition, to
the economic and industrial reasons, British forces helped liberate Iraq
from Saddam and for years with much heroism and sacrifice helped Basrah
survive the sectarian aftermath. They should be proud of what they
achieved. "

Many hearing his remarks probably thought of the news
in June about efforts in the UK to ensure that those who tortured
Iraqis not be legally punished. From Russia Today:

In
2003, dozens of men were allegedly hooded, stripped and beaten in
secret camps across Iraq. One innocent civilian has reportedly died
aboard a Royal Air Force helicopter, and a group of 63 others are still
considered missing after being taken to another secret prison located in
an oil pump station.The shocking revelation is worsened by
the fact that these events – which, if proven true, are clear violations
of international law – were apparently sanctioned by top lawyers in the
British Ministry of Defense, and kept secret from the Army's lawyer on
the ground in Iraq. Lieutenant Colonel Nicholas Mercer, the
chief British Army lawyer in Iraq during the 2003 invasion, told the
Mail on Sunday that what went on in this secret prison network amounted
to "war crimes."

Peter
Mandelson has admitted Tony Blair made a mistake invading Iraq, as he
did not foresee the prolonged violence that was to engulf the country.In
an interview with Esquire magazine, the former king of spin said Blair
had been expecting a "short, sharp success" rather than eight years of
sectarian killing."He expected it, obviously, not to be a walk in the park but to be a short, sweet success with the downfall of Saddam," he said."But
it didn't turn out like that, which was more the Americans' fault than
his, but I think he should have gone into it with his eyes wider open."

Sorry,
Mandelson, Tony didn't go to war with Iraq inspite of the US, in went
to war in partnership with the US. That means if the US is 'at fault,'
so is War Criminal Tony. We are judged by who we hop in bed with. As Stop The War Coalition notes, that wasn't War Criminal Tony's only public event this month:

Protest Tuesday 13 November 11amWar criminals & arms dealers out of our universitiesMain Entrance, University College London WC1E 6BT

ON TUESDAY 13 NOVEMBER, Tony Blair will be the headline speaker for the inaugural conference of University College London's Institute for Security & Resilience Studies (ISRS).

If you would like to attend Building an ethos of Resilience – A new Manifesto for Business, it costs just £714 a ticket -- or £354 at the "not for profit"rate.

This
is a departure from Mr Blair's recent public engagements, which have
focused more on the religious community. It is, however, perhaps more in
tune with his employment by the government of Kazakhstan, who currently
pay him £8 million a year to whitewash their human rights record.

The
ISRS was founded in 2008 by former MP John Reid. Reid was a key Blair
ally in the run-up to the Iraq war and an 'enforcer' within the Labour
Party. He was appointed Home Secretary following Robin Cook's
resignation to ensure few others would follow suit.

Reid
was known in Whitehall as 'Minister for Newsnight' for his skill in
pushing the Bush/Blair line in media appearances. The invasion of Iraq
may well be remembered as 'Blair's war', and not without some
justification. But there are many people who bear a great deal of
responsibility for that criminal act. John Reid is one of them.

Maybe the November 13th appearance will see someone attempt to Arrest Blair. The website notes it's already paid out money to several who made attempts to Arrest Blair:

Yet no matter who wins on Tuesday, much of what goes on in Washington won't be all that different.That's because there are significant limits on what a president can do without a compliant Congress. And forecasters expect the House to remain in Republican hands and the Senate to remain in Democratic hands.
That sets the stage for the same Congressional gridlock we've seen over
the past four years, when Congress' approval rating has hovered around 10 percent. And
let's say that Mr. Obama wins the election and the House also,
improbably, ends up in Democratic hands. Even if Democrats hold the
Senate, they still almost certainly won't have the 60 votes necessary to
overcome a filibuster, which will make it easy for Republicans to block
many of their policy goals. On the flip side, let's say Romney wins
and Republicans take control of the Senate and hang onto the House.
Republicans also wouldn't have 60 Senate votes, and while either party
could use a maneuver called "reconciliation" to circumvent the
filibuster on certain budget matters - this is what Republicans want to
use to block the health care law from going into effect - the minority
would still have significant power to stymie the majority.